Talk:Riven/@comment-33536623-20140127122040/@comment-9008617-20140131183055
"Counters.. I think Garen (silence is pretty good against AD casters since they do need their abilites to deal a majority of their damage )..." - Cliff Welcome to the conversation, been expecting you, Cliff. It's already been discussed ad nauseum. Early on the silence is only 1.5 seconds. It use to be a much more significant "counter" to casters, you're right, when it was 2.5 seconds at rank 1. Now, most Garens won't be levelling the Q passed rank 1 until level 8 and each rank only adds 0.25 seconds more silence. "Counter itemisation would be health and armor, ..." - Cliff So basically health and armor counters an AD champ like Riven. Common sense. Moving on. "Umm, I went off topic to flame you (StarSaviour)? Lol. " - Cliff Yes. Many many times in fact. "You'd always pick on small mistakes in spellings and highlight it and you expect me to not respond back? And at later posts you replied at the end in such a condescending manner... You're continually trying to portray yourself as the victim but you're the one who usually starts the flaming. Finally, when 2 people come at you for a particular reason, there MIGHT just be a problem in your attitude you should look into." - Cliff The times I picked at your spelling was because it was funny. The context being that you were attempting to insult or flame me but sounded like an idiot doing so. The "condescending" manner is a product of me being really tired of your continual b.s. posting. It's always the same. You and Mege always post 50% or less on-topic and just use that as a cover to attempt to flame or discredit me with the rest of the post... just like this one. You had the choice before re-engaging in a thread with me. You could've stayed on topic or PM me or avoid the thread altogether but you chose to dedicate half your post to flaming me again. If two "credible" posters with a vendetta and history against you keep instigating something, do you really think I care? "Another note, theorycrafting and anecdotal evidence both lack in some ways, theorycrafting may lack in many other variables (winions, masteries like spell weaving and blade weaving for Riven and Perseverance for Garen, rune preferences, I usually go for scaling MR in blues rather than CDR because there are usually AP carries in games, etc) as well as portraying a single situation among many possible ones. On the other hand anecdotal evidence lacks in knowledge of both player's skills with the champions at hand. Simply telling that one is better than the other is wrong." - Mege Sigh. Theorycrafting is only as complete as you make it. Everything in the game is based off numbers - everything. The more we actually spend time going over the variables together the more complete the discussion can be. Anecdotal evidence does not somehow cover all other variables. Even if you were to have every player ever involved in a Riven vs Garen matchup it still wouldn't further the discussion any. I've posted the link to the definition of "anecdotal evidence" like 5 times now. I've also explained why anecdotal evidence isn't reliable. Everything you've described (minions, masteries, and runes) can be accounted for by math/theorycrafting. "An honest question, have you (StarSaviour) played the matchup? I'm asking for your own views on it, not the math but from your personal experience." - Cliff Yes. You're seriously asking for my views..? There's probably enough writing here for a dissertation... "It also has the AD scaling with his base AD, so before armor the damage would be 120 + 118 x 1.1 dmg/sec for ~250 damage/sec and ~750 in 3 secs. After armor (from your viewpoint), it'd be 142 dmg/sec for a total of 426 in total, not that bad for a full tank." - Cliff My bad for not including the base AD at 18. It's actually 115 base AD and not 118 though. ;) 420'ish damage in total in 3 seconds at level 18 is really mediocre... Not only is Garen one of the easiest tanky champs to kite but there's so many better options if you're going for tanky and damage. "This made me chuckle a bit. From every mistake i've pointed out in your previous statements on other threads, you've only accepted one when I showed you definitive proof which you couldn't refute at all. Any others were ignored and flamed at later parts of your comment." - Cliff And how many mistakes have you actually proven before? I counted one before and the one just now. The one mistake before was because I screwed up reading the mana/level so I was off by like 20-30 mana at level 18 similar to how you screwed up Garen's base AD at level 18. And what did I do? I explained why I mistakened the value and accepted I was wrong. Mind blown. Yeah, it's crazy when you actually show "definitive proof" that people have to actually accept it. And really, Cliff, I'm sure you could accuse a lot of people for ignoring your "points" and you might be telling the truth most of the time. But please just stop trying to slander me when the proof's all over the wall. I'm one of those few a-holes who actually read the entire post, quote it, and reply to each point. You, Mege, and Leyrann on the other hand have had a notorious rep for posting a lot but selectively reading the responses. And geez, just because I truthfully call you out for ignoring points doesn't mean you can call me out on it and it'll be true. You really do have a weird thing for immitating the things I say...